memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Debris
Necessary? Is this article necessary? It is simply a slang term for debris. At best it should be merged with the slang article. --| TrekFan Open a channel 16:45, June 27, 2015 (UTC) :I support this. Tom (talk) 16:47, June 27, 2015 (UTC) ::Really it ought to be merged with debris, except no one has gotten around to making that article yet. How about this: rename this article debris, and I'll rewrite it, add more references etc, to make it into something respectable. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:13, June 27, 2015 (UTC) :Done. Feel free to rewrite. Tom (talk) 17:18, June 27, 2015 (UTC) :::And I've added the term "space junk" to 23rd century slang. --LauraCC (talk) 17:25, June 27, 2015 (UTC) Incomplete I've added a PNA to the article as there is mostly definitely more than one reference for this throughout Star Trek. --| TrekFan Open a channel 21:33, June 27, 2015 (UTC) :* :** :** :* :-- Tom (talk) 21:40, June 27, 2015 (UTC) ::Don't worry, I'm working on a complete and extensive rewrite. -- Capricorn (talk) 22:51, June 27, 2015 (UTC) Ah! Excellent! --| TrekFan Open a channel 12:00, June 28, 2015 (UTC) I have to say Capricorn, that you've done an excellent job on the article. Good work. --| TrekFan Open a channel 20:44, June 28, 2015 (UTC) Category I've added the category "Science" for now as I'm struggling to think of a more appropriate one. Anybody else care to have a shot? --| TrekFan Open a channel 21:33, June 27, 2015 (UTC) :What's the reasoning for the "technology"? It seems to me that debris is no more a technology then porkchop is an animal... -- Capricorn (talk) 22:59, June 27, 2015 (UTC) I don't know, it was Tom who added that category to the article. I am in agreement with you, however. I think "Materials" on it's own is the best category for this one. --| TrekFan Open a channel 12:01, June 28, 2015 (UTC) ::A debris field could also include the debris of a destroyed starship, I think I remember this from the episode . This is technology, wrong? Just materials would be finde to me, too. Tom (talk) 14:04, June 28, 2015 (UTC) :That's the point I was trying to make, a debris field would be less like technology, and more like what remained if you utterly destroyed a device. Shards of metal that happened to once be part of a technological device rather then something designed to perform a function. -- Capricorn (talk) 14:19, June 28, 2015 (UTC) I'm afraid I have to agree with Capricorn on this one. --| TrekFan Open a channel 20:44, June 28, 2015 (UTC) ::No need to be afraid. I removed the category. Tom (talk) 20:46, June 28, 2015 (UTC) Shrapnel Would shrapnel go in this article? and both mention it by name. --LauraCC (talk) 20:08, December 3, 2015 (UTC) I linked to the term on Foreign body, because it's both. --LauraCC (talk) 20:15, July 5, 2017 (UTC) More PNA * . --LauraCC (talk) 17:22, May 29, 2018 (UTC) Flotsam * --LauraCC (talk) 19:54, September 4, 2018 (UTC)